Reply #34: Several people in this thread [View All]

[Terran]

seem to believe that MI should count as-is because they perceive Obama's removing his name from that ballot as a cynical ploy. I have to ask: so what if it was? It was still the appropriate thing to do, regardless of additional motives, based on all the facts. Motive matters nothing here, actions and rules are what count. No reasonable person employing common sense would claim that Michigan held a viable election without having all the candidates' names on the ballot.

That said, I doubt it's going to matter. Why not just give her like 55% and him 45% of the delegates (given that she was "supposed" to have won that primary)? I think that's fair, and it's not going to change the picture substantially.